Ruger Mark III and Browning Buckmark

BruiseLeee said:
I got to shoot a Ruger 22/45 yesterday. I like it but there's a lot of plastic.

I think the magazine safety is a dangerous feature.

No built in trigger lock though. :)
Click to expand...

Bruise,

How is the magazine safety a danger?
 
45-70 said:
How is the magazine safety a danger?
Click to expand...

I reckon you have to stick in a magazine to release the trigger in order to put it away. If you happen to use a loaded one by accident it can make a hole somewhere.

I haven't been shooting very long but that's how I see it. :confused:
 
I own a Ruger 22/45 Mark II with a bull barrell and a Browning Buckmark - you can't go wrong with either. Both are accurate and well made and fit well in the hand. Not being particularly a 1911 fan, the Ruger esthetically doesn't look quite as nice to me as the Buckmark but has been mechanically flawless, whereas the Buckmark jams occasionally (probably would help if I cleaned it more frequently - I find both a bear to take apart for cleaning).
 
I have extensive experience with the Mark II, surpressed and unsurpressed. There are some things I don't like like the extra weight, small slide release, but no problems I can't live with.

These guns are indestructible.

I have always heard good things about the Mark III and Buckmark as well.

Don't be afraid to look around on the used market. I know the Rugers are tough no matter how much they are shot.
 
I have a Buckmark silohette. If I had to have only one 22 pistol it would not be a Buckmark. It is a wonderful, precision tool, but not the all around tool the Ruger is.

Beginning competitive shooters often use the Rugers. But Browning is not in the winners circle either- you get into guns with names I can't pronouce and shapes that look like the Star Ship Enterprise.

munk
 
The best .22 match target I ever scored was shot by a Distinguished Master using a Ruger Mark I with a 4" tapered barrel and that dinky, non-adjustable blade rear sight. The only thing cheaper than that gun was the ammo he was using, which was the stuff sold at Holiday gas stations at the time with a wildcat on the box.

I think guys like that just pull those kind of stunts to make Hammerli shooters cry, but Rugers are nothing to sneer at.
 
I've owned both and both are fine pistols. The Rugers are a bit harder to break down and clean. Well, thats not quite true. Breaking the Ruger down isn't so bad, putting it back together can be but once you get the hang of it its fine. Even after owning both I still wouldn't trade my S&W AirLite 22LR 8 shot revolver for two of either of these semi auto pistols you are asking about. I do still have my BuckMark though but it sees very little use these days since getting this AirLite revolver.

The revolver is just a lot more reliable and the difference in accuracy for the kind of shooting I do is nil between the two. Not to mention the difference in weight. The S&W AirLite probably only weighs as much as my multi tool and thats when loaded. I just like the fact that it doesn't have the chimmney stack, and jam problems that I've always seen with any semi auto in 22LR.

22 is such a really dirty round to shoot and I like not having to keep it so clean all the time. For me thats a plus. I don't know about the experiences of the rest of the guys shooting these semi auto 22s but mine go about 5 or 6 clips before starting to see some occassional jams and getting steadily worse after that. I have to stop and give my BuckMark a good cleaning after about 50 or 60 rounds and a very thourough cleaning after every 250 to 300 rounds fired with it. My old Smith semi auto and the Ruger were pretty much the same and for that matter so is my Marlin 22LR semi auto rifle. The Smith revolver is a whole different league when it comes to maintainance. It will go as far as you want to take it with only needing an occassional wire brushing to allow the shells to be removed easier from the chambers.

Keep in mind though that I'm not shooting a competition either. I might add that if you hunt with your pistol then you won't want the Smith I have. In my state 4" is the minimum for a pistol barrel to hunt with it. The Smith AirLite is under that by 1" but I kill rats all the time with this little Smith and its not any problem at all to pick them off at 20 yards plus. I killed two this morning with it.

On another note I've been shooting a lot of those little Super Collibri no gun powder loads out of it with very little to worry about when in the barn. The concussion from the echo off the walls is much nicer with these little guys in that enclosed space.

STR
 
That last post is very informative because it shows once again how individuals vary. ARe the new Buckmarks easier to take down? I think so- because the old one I have requires an engineering degree. Were the older Rugers harder to take down than the new ones? I don't know, I've heard they were.


munk
 
You've taught me something. I had no idea that 22LR semi-autos were so finicky about cleaning that often. My Smith & Wesson K-22 revolver gets the outside wiped off after every trip out, but only really cleaned once or twice a year....whether it needs it or not.....
 
You've taught me something. I had no idea that 22LR semi-autos were so finicky about cleaning that often.
Click to expand...

I've found that the semi auto anything in 22LR are indeed a PITA for a guy like me that doesn't take time to clean up after each shooting day. I simply must have something that works even if its dirty. Personally I've never owned a 22SA that didn't jam and have feed problems on any given day we used them even after they were broke in.

What I've owned in 22:

I've had a Taurus 22LR. I think it was called the PT pistol. Just a little conceal carry piece with a neat pop up barrel that I thought would be nice for a single shot or for an easier way to make the first round go in since it was incredibly hard to pull the slide back for both me and the wife. I've also had two Rugers, an early one my dad had that my brother has now, a Mark I I think, and a Mark III, one BuckMark that I still have and the S&W 22A semi auto. All of these except the one from my dad were bought new and all had 4" barrels except for the snubby Taurus.

I bought the little Papoose model 70PSS 22LR Marlin Semi Auto Rifle with the floatation case and the break down feature years ago because I'd never seen anything like it in stainless. Don't get me wrong its a nice gun and all and I do take it with me sometimes but I wouldn't trade my stainless Marlin 22LR bolt action that I bought after the semi auto for it or two semi autos like it for that matter. The bolt action one, although longer is just a better rifle all around.

One other thing I like about the bolt action rifle in this Marlin is the fact that the bolt action one shoots without the magazine in it whereas the semi auto is worthless without the mag. It has to be in or the trigger won't even function at all. I find that annoying to say the least and won't buy a gun that way anymore pistol or rifle. For a brief time I got to play with a Browning walnut wood stock 22LR rifle belonging to my brother in law and while I'll admit it was a quality piece with the old style loading of the tube, the made in Japan thing didn't do anything for me. It was a beautiful finish and good feel though. I was not too impressed with it overall in performance any more than any other semi auto 22LR I've ever shot. It was accurate when it worked though.

I shoot 22LR and 22 Magnum a lot. Ten times more than any other caliber. All my 22s rifles and pistols see thousands of rounds through the barrels from brick after brick that I shoot every year both for recreation and varmint killing. The two best I have ever had are the Marlin bolt action rifle model 880SS and this S&W AirLite revolver. These are hands down the only way to go for a dirty ole man like myself! :D


STR
 
I love my Ruger MkII. I would guess I've shot 20 different config. of these at one point or another. Excellent guns. They can be a pain in the buttocks to take apart and reassemble however.

I like the Buckmark too. Have heard very few complaints, usually a little more money for them.

The next 22 auto I get will be the SigSauer Mosquito. Not much more money. And they handle like a dream.
 
There's a reason those car ads say YMMV (your mileage may vary). I have had different experience with my semi auto .22s. They (with notable exception of that S&W mentioned above) have been very reliable with relatively infrequent cleaning and lots of shooting.

I too liked the feel and etc. of the Sig; but check the price of mags and consider your accuracy requirements as I've heard spotty reports.
 
Finicky semi auto 22's do not last.
The market will not bear them.
The Rugers are known for reliability.

I've sold a lot of Rugers, but never owned one. I have a Colt Challenger, a Walther .22, and the Browning Buckmark.


The Taurus with the pop up barrel is a Berreta knock off. I don't recall any complaints about it.

If I were buying a new semi auto 22 handgun, I'd probably get the Ruger.


munk
 
As I said, my Ruger is more reliable than my revolvers. And it's a rimfire. The three times that it has malfunctioned (it's malfunctioned once since then), the ammunition was the culprit: the dreaded "bargain brick dud." It just keeps chugging along. As dirty as the action gets it doesn't seem to lock up; rimfire bores don't really get dirty in my experience unless they're very rough and this one is quite smooth. (Two wet and dry patches to clean, regardless of round count; it's never seen a brush. Never needed it.) I clean it for my own peace of mind, not because it's required. Most range trips I just oil the bore to prevent rusting and don't even bother with the cleaning.

Upon closer analysis, the secrets of the Ruger's success are apparent: an exceedingly loose chamber, a relatively heavy reciprocating mass, a simple design and cast, stamped, or injection-molded parts for dimensional stability with minimal machining. I'm not surprised that they're reliable. What surprises me in the MkIII's case is that it has such a reputation for accuracy, as according to conventional theory it should be anything but.

Leave it to old Bill to punk out the armchair analysts. Now if only he'd made the thing a little easier to put back together and skipped the damned magazine safety...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top